Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games) Businesses

Xbox 360 'Must Sell Out' on Release Day 132

Posted by Zonk
tlhIngan writes "According to a Norwegian retailer (as reported by Gizmodo), Microsoft's making some peculiar demands during the XBox 360 launch. In particular, each retailer is to get 20 XBox 360 consoles (6 core editions, and 14 premium editions). However, to get the full allocation, they have to ensure they will sell out on the day of release (December 2nd over there)! Plus, each console must leave the store with at *least* two games each. Is Microsoft marketing like the beanie babies again - using 'Sold Out!' as a way to hype the popularity of their machine? It may appear to be, since Microsoft recently slowed down production of the XBox 360 as well."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox 360 'Must Sell Out' on Release Day More

Xbox 360 'Must Sell Out' on Release Day

Comments Filter:
  • Then shouldn't they give a lower amount of X-Boxes to the stores? Like, maybe 15 or 10?

    Either way, this is pretty dumb of Microsoft, but I suppose it could work for people who haven't read this article. After all, generally, sold out = damn good/necessary/useful, right?

    Oh Microsoft, you clever bastards.
  • As an avid gamer I eagerly await each new console's release. I remember how frustrating it was back when the PS2 launched, and darn near impossible to get one on opening day, but it sure looks like that's what's happening here. With Walmart and Target getting between 20-60, I believe, and shortages all over the place, it looks like only a few lucky gamers will get one. Maybe if they cooled it on all the "Win an Xbox 360" things they have going on, more people who really want one can get one on launch day.

    • Re:That's so frustrating! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BRock97 ( 17460 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:49PM (#13935290) Homepage
      It's funny, as a guy who has owned and played nearly everything from the Atari 2600 through the Gamecube, I can't help but comment on how underwhelmed I am with this launch. To be honest, there isn't one title that is compelling me to go out and get the 360, which is somewhat surprising. PS2 had Tekken 4, Gamecube had Star Wars, and the XBox had Halo (all fantastic games and worth the price of admission), but nothing is trippin' the old game thumbs this time around.
       
      To be honest, I wish Microsoft would have gulped down a ittle pride and pushed the release back six months. All the press is pointing to the PS3 not being a threat until later in 2006 so Microsoft would still have had that window to establish a strong first response. I would get excited about some of the other features such as the online stuff for FPS and the integrated Media Center functionality, but my mouse and keyboard are too cherished (hear that Microsoft! Let us use our mouse and keyboards and you would have me at "hello") and from what I have read, the Media Center functionality is limited to 720P playback for HDTV content from the media center PC. (Note: I said HDTV playback, not games. I am aware that the 360 can do games up to 1080i, but I would want my video there, too. Plus, they aren't even going to upscale DVDs!)
       
      So, I too will probably wait from something really high-profile like Halo3 to come out. As much as I wanted to get to my local Best Buy at 5 A.M., I think I will pass this round.....
      • But there are some consumers who want to get the console ASAP. If the hardware is release-quality, what's the problem if Microsoft releases it on Nov 22? As others noted, more choice is always good for consumer. (on the other hand, if launch games aren't release quality, then they should push back the dates for the individual games)

        Plus, they aren't even going to upscale DVDs!

        If you have a decent scaler in your TV, you don't need it.

        Also, the PS3's Cell processor looks like it might have enough h

        • "If you have a decent scaler in your TV, you don't need it."

          I guess if you aren't serious about the picture quality, then yeah, I could agree. The problem is that on a 65" screen, I can tell a huge difference. Take a 480p player and have the resolution blown up to a TVs native resolution by the set itself versus running an HTPC at the screen's native resolution with an application like TheaterTek [theatertek.com] upconverting for you. Night and day. I have not seen a set yet that handles this as well (I have taken a lo
          • Define "serious". :)

            Don't you have problems with SD OTA/television/cable content on a 65" TV too? If so, isn't it better to have a proper scaler either in your TV, or as an external box [algolith.com] right before your TV? (FWIW, that price is better than what was previously available at the top-end [paperlined.org])

            • Sure, SD cable is horrible. SD off the air is far better. Both are only 480i, though, and will pale when compared to a true 480p DVD (plus DVDs have been greatly cleaned up compared to a standard broadcast). Plus, the TheaterTek software I mentioned before is a miracle working when it comes to all of this stuff. Incredible software. I pipe all of this through a Media Center Edition PC that is upscaling the picture to 1920x1080p. Additionally, the latest Catalyst drivers for ATI are performing image en
              • As interiot pointed out, an external scaler would be a MUCH more elegant solution since it would a) be useful with all signals (if you truly are displaying 1080p, a good external box could probably even improve 1080i over your display's internals) and b) offer you better choices in terms of DVD playback. I would further wonder why someone who claims to have a 65" 1080p display (something that had to cost SERIOUS money) would even consider using a game console for DVD playback, upconverted or not.

                Finally,

      • Re:That's so frustrating! (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        PS2 had Tekken 4

        PS2 didn't have Tekken 4 at launch. Nowhere near it.
      • "To be honest, I wish Microsoft would have gulped down a little pride and pushed the release back six months."

        And they would have if they cared about us. Thing is, they observed that PS2 sold better, and a big reason for that was its early launch. So they're like, if we put a console on the market, a lot of people/parents are gonna get even if there isn't anything marvellous for the console yet. What they want is cold, hard, market share. Period.

        (Not to say they don't care about gamers, but I'd say the
        • This is the most overhyped launch of video game consoles ever. It is almost sickening how much frosting is being tossed around by marketing with no games at all. People are just debating over hardware potential. Talk about arguing over vaporware.

          I need to see at least 5 great games on a console before even considering an investment. Keyword is "great".

      • Japan-style launch (Score:4, Insightful)

        by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @11:26PM (#13938171) Homepage
        Thank you for saying this.

        The Xbox 360 seems like the first Japan-style worldwide launch: Out of the gate early with few supporting games. Japanese consumers are notoriously technophilic, and in the past have bought systems on the promise of future titles and little else. US consumers have appeared the opposite: punishing the N64 for releasing with just 3 titles (even if one was one of the greatest games ever), and the Saturn for a similarly non-stellar launch.

        Both were going up against competition, though, and that is where the key lies. If Microsoft knows the battle is ahead, as they are waiting for the PS3 to launch Halo 3. For now, they seem contented to launch with what appear to be underwhelming but nice games, and get a few buys before digging in their heels for the PS3 and Revolution launches. Once great games start being sold, we'll have a real battle on our hands. Expect to see blood in Christmas 2006 and 2007. This? This is just the pre-show.

  • Bundles. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:23PM (#13935081)
    "each console must leave the store with at *least* two games each."

    In other words they are FORCING the $700+ bundles that stores like GameStop are trying to force on customers, except Microsoft is ensuring that EVERY retailer in the country does this so that consumers have no choice. Nice.

    • Re:Bundles. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Otter ( 3800 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:34PM (#13935175) Journal
      Well, the "choice" is to wait 24 hours instead of jumping into the mosh pit to be one of the first 20 Norwegians in the door on December 2.

      I certainly regard these schemes to use consumer frenzies for PR as degrading to human dignity, but it's not like you have to be one of the idiots trampling each other at 5 am on "Black Friday".

      • Re:Bundles. (Score:2, Funny)

        by grub ( 11606 )
        That's right, be a man and buy one only when there's a mod chip available. The longer the wait the less you really care.
        • This is funny, but that is what many people will be doing. one of the considerations is which console is more "modable".

          Of course I wont be....nooooo....no mod chip here...
          • PS3 = built in HD = teh modding win!
          • Waiting is a bad idea. The longer you wait, the longer the chance Microsoft has to change the internals to be less moddable. By default, the earliest models are going to be the most moddable.
            • It's unlikely that MS will go making major changes before a mod chip exists. Simply wait for a mod-chip, and then buy as soon as it's released. With Live though, you always run the risk of future troubles anyways.

              Besides, one should NEVER buy into corporate whoring that is release day. People forget that us consumers are the ones with power, if only we could act more intelligently than horny apes.

    • Re:Bundles. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Allison Geode ( 598914 )
      and i got called a troll for saying the cost of the system was $500. (the core system is *not* what most people will want to buy (and even if they do, you still have to buy a memory card, since it has no hard drive, so kiss another $30 away for that, and then you have a function system without a game), and yes, you do need to get at least one game, but if you're getting one, why not two, or at least an extra controller so your friend can play too?

      the cost of a launch console isn't the price on the box. you
      • Exactly. Once the system price gets to around the $200 mark, things might change a bit. But expecting people to shell out $300 for the console (which won't even run any of the older games you might have -- you need the $100 hard disc for that), plus $50-60 for a game (there aren't any used or classic games yet), and $40 for a memory card. You're already at nearly $400, and you only have a single game to play on it. If you're stupid enough to go to EB/GameStop, they'll gouge you for at least $600 for the
        • I doubt the price will ever do so, at least in primary retail outlets. I'm sure MS will release "Value Packs" with 1 or 2 games to try and justify prolonging the initial retail price.

          When we do see a $200 dollar version (that isn't crippled, aka no HD) it'd have to be a serious reason for it, and those reasons are never good.
        • $399 for the console plus Microsoft requires it be bundled with two games (Let's say $100), that's $500 for the non-crippled version, and $400 for the crippled (sans-harddrive) version.

          That's a lot of money for a console. Now, if I go to Ye Olde Videogame Shoppe, I'm going to see a new XBOX bundled with 2 games for $179. I'm going to see a 360 with 2 games for $600. Does the 360 really offer me three times the value? I really doubt it.

      • Damn... and to think I remember the old days where a console came with everything you needed: system, cables, two controllers and at least one game. While R.O.B. never worked when I got my NES Deluxe Set I was getting two games (Gyromite and Duck Hunt), two controllers, a light gun, and a goddamn robot with his own accessories.

        The more recent idea where you buy the console itself, with no game, and only one controller is pretty damn crappy. Especially when you consider that most consoles are selling for muc
        • It depends on whether you got a choice about the two games that come with it. In reality, these games are not free - the price of them is simply included in the base price of the console. You pay for them whether you want them or not.

    • Re:Bundles. (Score:5, Funny)

      by PhoenixOne ( 674466 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @07:31PM (#13936745)
      Am I the only one that got excited reading this? Microsoft expects to have at least two games ready by launch!!!

  • Ah, those crazy retailers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Keeper ( 56691 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:23PM (#13935085)
    Sounds very much like the retail chains' requirements, not Microsoft's.
    • The "must sell with 2 games" might possibly be reatailer-initiated, but the "must sell out" certainly isn't... if you're a retail store, you want to have slightly MORE stock than is necessary, to make sure that when the n+1 person walks in your door with a fist full of cash, that you have a console to sell them.
      • Your assuming that the store can actually order more stock than is necessary. If you have limited stock, would you rather send it to a store that only sells half of it, or to a store that will sell all of it?

  • Possible reason (Score:5, Insightful)

    by theantipop ( 803016 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:26PM (#13935110)
    Another possible reason they are doing this is that they want to get the machines only in the hands of the hardcore gamers and Xbox fans. Doing so will generate a lot of positive buzz. Along with the beanie baby type marketing mentioned, it could result in a huge second push of sales. That seems a bit far-fetched and conspiracy like, but you never know when it comes to MS marketing.

    • Re:Possible reason (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Bastian ( 66383 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:39PM (#13935216)
      That seems a bit far-fetched and conspiracy like

      No, it seems to me like exactly what you would want to do if you were a huge corporation pushing a huge product but wanted to create a huge viral marketing campaign without *too* much effort on your part.

      If it really is what MS is trying to do, I think it's a master stroke on their part. The 360 is launching way ahead of any console in its generation, so Microsoft has plenty of time to sacrifice initial launch sales in favor of higher sales in the long run.
      • If it really is what MS is trying to do, I think it's a master stroke on their part.

        A master stroke? Fact is, everyone wants to be able to say their stuff is a sell-out hit. Nintendo pulled these shenanigans with copies of Mario 3 back in their "evil period." If Microsoft were confident in the 360's success, they wouldn't have to do this.

        Fact is, Microsoft is worried about pulling a PSP on launch day. No matter what Sony said about it being a runaway hit from day one, all those boxes lying around Target

    • Re:Possible reason (Score:2, Insightful)

      by KDR_11k ( 778916 )
      The drawback is that word of mouth has more time to spread. So if the launch games suckl and the guys who got one are disappointed they have enough time to tell all their friends before they buy one.

  • Then lower the prices (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EnronHaliburton2004 ( 815366 ) * on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:28PM (#13935129) Homepage Journal
    This sounds silly, but the traditional way to "sell out" of an item is to lower it's price. Keeping the price high by artificial fixed prices means that it's hard to "sell out".

    I briefly considered buying an Xbox360, but then I saw the price. Forget it. My 3 year old computer provides enough game power for my needs. Maybe I'll buy a used console in a year or two.

    • Re:Then lower the prices (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Even if Microsoft lowered the price of the Premium bundle to $199.99 I think they would have a great deal of difficulty selling out a reasonable innitial shipment of systems; the reason for this is that there are no really compelling games at launch. In a lot of ways I am reminded of both the Dreamcast launch and the PSP launch when I think about the XBox 360's launch. The 360 is being released with the timing of the Dreamcast, with the launch line-up and cost of the PSP; I can't see how this will turn up s
    • I thought the traditional way to sell out your platform was to make a good system with good games. I believe it took several years for the PS2 to drop from $300. This isn't Nintendo we're talking about, who will just cut prices because it's Monday.

    • Re:Then lower the prices (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Red Flayer ( 890720 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @05:18PM (#13935536) Journal
      "This sounds silly, but the traditional way to "sell out" of an item is to lower it's price.

      That's the traditional way to sell out an overstock. The 360 won't be overstocked, it will be intentionally understocked.

      "Keeping the price high by artificial fixed prices means that it's hard to 'sell out'."

      They aren't keeping the price high by artificially fixed prices. They are keeping the ideal pricing point high by limiting supply.

      MS needs to justify the high MSRP for the 360... and the high wholesale price. MS doesn't want to reduce the price until late next year. The best way to do that is by showing that there is enough demand that you still sell out at the current price.

      Producers of a unique commodity often limit supply to keep demand and price (by extension) high. My understanding is that MS will be taking a loss on each unit anyway... so if they have to drop the price in the short-term, they'll be hemorrhaging instead of slowly leaking.

      This isn't artificial price-fixing. This is manipulation of the market by restricting supply. It's done all the time with unique goods, and preserves the profit incentive to continue producing innovative goods.
      • The 360 won't be overstocked, it will be intentionally understocked.

        You honestly believe that line? "Hmmm, there seems to be all this demand for our system, so LET'S SHIP FEWER OF THEM TO SELL!"

        People sure are reaching to find ways to attack Microsoft.
        • I'm not attacking MS, I'm explaining what they are doing. Did you bother reading my post?

          If you had an understanding of supply vs demand and how it affects pricing, maybe you'd realize why it is good for MS to intentionally understock. Never mind all the other reasons that understocking may help increase demand, not just allow a high price point for longer.
          • Claiming they'd even consider intentionally understocking the console can be seen as an attack, since it's suggesting they're wanting to leave some people without a console that they really want to buy.

            Any theoretical benefit to understocking is surely not as big a benefit as trying to make sure as many people as possible who want 360s will be able to get them. The more sold, the more games and accessories sold, the quicker the installed base increases, and the better the head start over the PS3.

            Not only i
            • You might see it as an attack, but that's because you are looking for an attack. Doesn't mean that it is one. You are also working from the assumption that responding to the market in the most profitable way is a bad thing -- otherwise, why would this be negative?

              "Any theoretical benefit to understocking is surely not as big a benefit as trying to make sure as many people as possible who want 360s will be able to get them. The more sold, the more games and accessories sold, the quicker the installed bas
        • Simple psychology 101 stuff. People want what they can't have, they more they can't have it, the more they want it.

          Microsoft ships a small amount of 360s for a period of time, this builds hype because it will be in an state of "sold out" for some time, people see this and think "hey, this must be pretty hot stuff, I want one", eventually supply will increase to a more reasonable level, but only after the hype has been built.

          Don't you watch South Park? [arcor.de]

          Hey, everybody! Check out the all new Cartmanland! It's

        • You honestly believe that line? "Hmmm, there seems to be all this demand for our system, so LET'S SHIP FEWER OF THEM TO SELL!"

          Are you seriously denying that this happens? It's exactly what's happening with PSPs in the UK at the moment. They've been out for over two months. I got one pre-order, which arrived a couple of days after launch, but a mate has had his on order since the week after go-live and it still hasn't turned up yet. They are being delivered to stores in ones and twos, and the backlog is slow
      • They aren't keeping the price high by artificially fixed prices. They are keeping the ideal pricing point high by limiting supply.

        I don't think getting a high price was their main goal with restricting the availability. They don't have to restrict the availability of 360s in order to get $500 (or whatever it is). They can simply refuse to sell it for less than their desired price. I think the point is (as an earlier poster commented) to make sure the only people who get a 360 is the person willing to s

        • "They can simply refuse to sell it for less than their desired price"

          But that's not the ideal price point. I'm sure they've analyzed the market to determine their strategy for sales and pricing, it's not like any mass-produced good is just put onto the market with a number pulled from a pie.

          In terms of the early adopters (the segment of the market at the highest part of the dmeand curve) affecting the future demand curve, I agree with you and the earlier poster.

          However, this is also an anecdotal exp

  • It Isn't Really Such a Challenge (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Alamoth ( 927972 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:38PM (#13935211)
    Is this really so lofty of a goal for Mircrosoft to set for their new system. Retailers should have no issue finding 20 reservists for the system. This is similar to the numbers of reservists for most other consoles (XBox, GC, PS2) and is probably a very small portion of the consumer base for any given retailer.

    Each customer must also purchase 2 games. It's obviously a given that everyone will be buying at least one game (Halo 3) and then why not any of the other promising titles that come out with the release. Most (if not all) gamers like to diversify their playing experience.

    The big issue here is the money of course. The premium system already will run $400 and games (I haven't checked the exact price yet) will probably run the standard $50. Anyone who is going to shell out the $400 (or $300) for the system will probably manage to scrounge up another $100 for two games.

    I'll be surprised if Microsoft doesn't manage to sell out the 360 on the first day.
    • Halo 3 won't be a launch title, MS announced they'll release that for the PS3 launch. Elder Scrolls 4 Oblivion was delayed as well so how many launch titles do you really want?
      • I think we'll easily see a lot of people going out and getting the system with Project Gotham Racing 3 and Madden '06 as their first two titles. They were very popular on the XBox and will most likely be so for the 360. Sports titles, remember, are still one of the dominant genres of console games and Madden is one of the most prominent of them.
    • I can see the full version selling out no problem...but who in their right mind would want the "core system" that doesn't come with a hard drive? I guarantee every retailer's shelves will be full of those mistakes.
    • $60 has already been pretty well established as the price for next gen games (hopely only until they realize that people aren't excited about paying that much) and Halo 3 won't be available at launch.

      As for the rest, I totally agree, 20 XBox 360's per site? They'd sell out if they had 100. However, this info is not for the U.S., perhaps stores here will get more inventory.
      • I'm not so sure. I know a few people interested in the 360 eventually, but none who are willing to pay release prices. Especially with the lack of games available on day 1 (their big games have almost all been pushed out). I think MS may be setting themselves up for disappointment here.

  • Illegal (Score:4, Interesting)

    by El_Muerte_TDS ( 592157 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:44PM (#13935262) Homepage
    Plus, each console must leave the store with at *least* two games each.

    I'm pretty sure this is illegal in a lot of places. (at least in the nehterlands)
    • Do you have any evidence of the legality of such a system?

      It seems this is a system that will be run through reserves anyways. In order to reserve a system you'll simply have to reserve two games as well. I suspect retailers will attempt to sell out through reserves only so they don't have to actually sell any systems when it releases. Then they can go back to normal business on the following day of selling systems and games.

    • They will make it legal...
    • How? You can tell the customer, "We have a limited number, so we'd like to put it in the hands of people who'll use it more. If you want, you can come back a few days later and see if it's still available." Isn't that valid?

      • Re:Illegal (Score:3, Informative)

        by caitsith01 ( 606117 )
        No, grandparent is correct. It is illegal in many places to force a person to purchase one product if they want to purchase another. However, this is typically only the case where the product they actually want (the 360, in this case) has significant market power that is being abused in the sale of the secondary product (the games).

        Fairly typical competition law stuff.

  • Oh well (Score:3, Funny)

    by dtfinch ( 661405 ) * on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:45PM (#13935270) Journal
    I guess I don't really need to buy an Xbox 360, given the shortage and all.

  • I'd like to read the agreement (Score:4, Funny)

    by max born ( 739948 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:49PM (#13935292)
    each shop or chain has to sign an agreement saying that they will sell out of all 20 consoles on the release date (which is December 2 over there).

    Wonder what the penalty is if the retailer can't sell them all?

  • Lack of choices always bad for consumer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jtheletter ( 686279 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:52PM (#13935313)
    This is the kind of thing that has always pissed me off about consoles, they bundle the console and force a certain package on you. This means that you end up spending more than you want and getting things you're not interested in. When I got my first xbox it was bundled with Clone Wars/Tetris (no interest) and before that the family xbox was bundled with Jetset Radio (again zero interest). If these games were free with the system, or if there were a choice of games it would be ok, but as it was you were basically forced to pay and extra $55 for games you probably didn't care about. And because of the (IMHO) crappy play value of these games coupled with the huge number of them out there, you could get maybe $5 reselling them to the store.

    Now not only are gamers going to be forced to buy price-inflated bundles yet again, but the store won't even sell them the system if they don't drop another $100+ right then and there for two other games. I suppose if you're set on being a first adopter you'll find something you want but if you really don't care for the release titles and would rather save the extra $65 for Halo3 or something, well tough titty you're out of luck, no system for you.

    Console manufacturers need to find a better way to make back costs w/o screwing over the consumer. If I want to buy just a plain console, one controller and a single game of my choosing then I should be able to. Bundles just artificially increase system prices so M$ can take less of a loss on first-sales. This is no way to treat the customers who are your primary supporters (the first-to-have crowd), although they tend to buy at any price - only making it easier for M$ to take advantage of them. And the artifical scarcity tactic only disgusts and insults me as a consumer. Either sell your product or don't but screwing around with supply to inflate demand only serves to alienate and disappoint people who are already interested in buying your product. Sorry for the rant.

    • It seems like the fairly obvious solution is wait until you can buy the things unbundled. Sure, you might have to wait a few months but you get rewarded by being patient. You get a better price, you have more of a selection, and the hardware is usually a later rev and has less of a chance to fail. Let early adopters suffer. And if there is just no way to find any console without a bundle, I imagine you can track down used systems eventually.
    • No game stores that I know of will take a bundled title (one that came inside the console), such as Clone Wars (bundled with Xbox) in trade in for any amount of money. Hell, most won't even take it for free, and if they do, will immediately throw it away.
    • At least they are not going to the extreme the corps do in this book [barnesandnoble.com]

      Short run down:
      1. Uber-hype a new pair of shoes,
      2. Only deliver 4 to a single store in each city to create psycho demand, hire a gunman to cap a kid in the crowd to give the shoe "Street Cred".
      3. PROFIT!!!!
      4. Then avoid the government coming after you... :-)

      That is not the whole book, just one sub-plot. Really great book.
    • Now not only are gamers going to be forced to buy price-inflated bundles yet again,

      Nobody's forcing you to do anything. If you don't think the options are worth the money, don't buy. It's that easy.

    • if you really don't care for the release titles and would rather save the extra $65 for Halo3 or something, well tough titty you're out of luck, no system for you.

      Then just wait until Head Like A Halo 3 comes out before you buy the system. Is there a problem with that?

    • Either sell your product or don't but screwing around with supply to inflate demand only serves to alienate and disappoint people who are already interested in buying your product.

      Ask yourself something, are you alienated and disappointed by Ferrari, Maserati, Aston Martin or Lamborghini? How about the makers of Cristael? The good 'ol boys at Orange County Choppers? All of their products come with high price tags. They have to in order for their business to survive. Consider this, if a Lotus only put you ba
      • First, thank you for the well-written, reasoned reply, it can be rare.

        I do have a few points I'd like to rebuke though. First, the other products you mentioned are extremely high-priced high-end products, and are well outside of the majority of people's budgets so it's a bit unfair to try to compare their scarcity with a video game system. (I do understand the 360 is essentially the console equivalent of the top-end, high priced hardware for its market segment, but I think we can both agree that most peop

    • This is the kind of thing that has always pissed me off about consoles, they bundle the console and force a certain package on you.

      They're just doing it because it's a good strategy, and it's a good strategy because dumbasses like you keep falling for it. So you ought to be pissed off at yourself.

      • They're just doing it because it's a good strategy, and it's a good strategy because dumbasses like you keep falling for it. So you ought to be pissed off at yourself.

        The two xboxes I mentioned receiving in my post were gifts, and both were purchased after price drops in the system, so no, I nor the people who bought the gifts "fell for it". By the time I received an Xbox for Christmas it had been on the market for over 20 months, yet no systems were available for purchase w/o getting a bundle.

        That's my

  • At least two games? (Score:5, Funny)

    by KDR_11k ( 778916 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @04:58PM (#13935368)
    Plus, each console must leave the store with at *least* two games each.

    A thief grabs an Xbox 360, tries to run away. Security holds him. "Sorry mister, but I'm not allowed to let anyone leave with an XBox 360 and less than two games for it!"

  • Applied Marketing Research (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blueZhift ( 652272 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @05:08PM (#13935455) Homepage Journal
    Well it just looks like Microsoft is making use of what marketing research seems to be telling us about human behaviour. Things that are in short supply, no matter the cause, tend to be valued more. There also seem to be more than enough hardcore gamers to create buzz on the first day no matter how much those first 20 360s cost or what the bundles are. You'd think that if people know they're being manipulated this way, they would choose not to participate, but in the end, people want what they want. So it really doesn't matter how artificial the manipulation is, some shops are still going to be mobbed.

    But, given all of the above, they could still come out weak like the PSP launch if they're not careful. As the mantra goes, it's the games that really matter. If they get things like Perfect Dark Zero out on launch day then they've got a shot at a strong launch, if not there will be plenty of 360s on the shelves on days two and three.
  • Think about it: they sell all their X-boxes to the idiots who have to have this new plaything the minute it gets into the stores. These people will whine and bitch about the faults it has. MS has time to correct the faults, and then all of a sudden the X-box is available for everyone, and most people are happy with it.
  • Mighty interesting to get a first-hand account from an irate shop owner. Thanks SilverSnake!

    So a report from one shop owner suddenly applies to massive retailers and small retailers globally? I'll believe it when I hear a similar report coming from Wal-Mart, Target or EBGames (or whatever they're called now).

    For all we know, Microsoft simply wants this one retailer to sign to this agreement because they ordered an unusually high number.

  • Microsoft is the distributor of the product. Target, Best Buy... etc. order and pay for the units at a fixed negotiated rate, right? Yes they want software sold but what do they care if all 20 get sold the first day or not? The demand is there and their bill is paid. It's not like they are getting a percentage of first day sales... they should be getting their money up front from the retailers. Plus, wouldn't they want THEIR launch games to go with the console rather than just ANY of the titles at laun
    • "The demand is there and their bill is paid."

      The retailers' bills may be paid, but not Microsoft's. You're forgetting that Microsoft is selling these devices at a lost, and they want to "sell out" as fast as possible to jump to Phase 3 before Wall Street starts to ask too many questions about Phase 2.
  • Forcing bundles is a common retail tactic. EB has been doing it for years. Anyone remember the Game Doctor that they forced you to get with your PS2? I do. I was one of the poor bastards that was forced to sell it to you. As far as MS is concerned, if you pre-ordered an Xbox360 you can walk out of the store with JUST the console. But that isn't up to MS, if the pre-order is at GameStop or EB. In that case, you have no choice. And a Norwegian source? Give me a break. How far do you need to go to get bullsh

  • It's the games, Stupid (Score:3, Informative)

    by Kozar_The_Malignant ( 738483 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2005 @05:33PM (#13935649)
    I really don't give a frosty crank about the system. It's the games that matter, and there's nothing out there right now that makes me want to go buy a 360 so I can play it. Right now, I'm far more inclined to put the substantial cost of the latest gen console toward a new HD TV.

  • enforcement (Score:2, Interesting)

    by nmec ( 810091 )
    how exactly is this going to be enforced, how do they intend to check up on retailers? Surely they could report back to microsoft that they'd sold two games as promised, but just hold the ones people didn't want in the stock room then order a few less over the next few weeks as the excess is sold off 'naturally'
  • When they were writing this, did a paperclip pop-up and say "It looks like you're writing an intimidating press release..."
  • Google now. use making it so on launch your system MUST be packaged with 2 games? Good work.

    Seriously now, am I an idiot or does this type of totalitarian tactic not jib with any one else's morals? This "sell out or you'll not get anything from us" sounds a lot like their other dealings. Personally I'd be suprised if in the future it's "sell Halo 3 with a bigger sign then the ps3 or don't get the game"

    What Microsoft needs to realize is that Pre-order isn't NECESSARY to force. These companies would kil
  • Speaking of 'Sell Out', who is actually going to by this microsoft product? :)

  • My predictions... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Max Nugget ( 581772 )
    I don't wish ill on the XBox, I think it's generally been a positive influence on the gaming industry. Here's what I think might happen though:

    1. XBox 360 is released, and immediately falls into the hands of the "hardcore gamers." Invariably, most people buy a copy of Perfect Dark Zero as one of their two bundled games.

    2. Those who didn't buy PDZ will tend to be disappointed, as the rest of the XBox 360 game line-up will fall somewhere between "pathetic" and "not bad but I feel like an idiot for spending $7
    • Halo? XBOX launched with a killer app by that name. I believe you're neglecting it.
    • An addendum: Microsoft may face another obstacle, in that Perfect Dark Zero, regardless of whether it turns into a killer app via word-of-mouth, it does not currently have the hype or awareness level of a killer app game. The Perfect Dark series is not well known in the mainstream, and the hype level just isn't there right now, a mere 2 weeks from launch time. PDZ, thus, won't reach "killer app" status at least until it's been on the market for a couple weeks. This may in some part explain MS's strategy for
  • Shady business tactics - in other words, business as usual for M$.

    What part of this constitues news? ;)

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close